I think the framing is pretty much bang on, given always that Russ doesn't get to move people or objects around, according the rules of the game he plays.

The Walk sign is fully in the frame, as it absolutely must be. The person out of frame to the right is out of frame, just as that person must be. Thus, the right edge is exactly where it needs to be, and the margin there was quite narrow. This, of course, also determines the left side of the frame. It might have been nice to place the central figure slightly left, this would have brought too much of the out of frame figure into the frame -- possibly also a fine image, but not THIS image. Also, placing the figure slightly left would mean getting closer, which would disturb the verticals:

Vertically? I think the central figure's head is fortuitously placed. I would not have minded if the foot was entirely in frame, but you'd have paid for that with lost sky. Maybe not a major crime, but then neither is the cropped foot. It aids a sense of motion, the sense of the central figure entering the frame.

It is essential to street that you take the good with the bad. If not, you're faking it. The goal is to have the important things be amongst the good, and the bad things be unimportant. Then edit away the ones that still aren't pulling their weight.

The instant caught here, with the hands just so, matters profoundly. This was well done.

Must be down to mental agility and reflexes as is also the case in much of my own work.

Here's an idea Walter: How about posting some of your pictures that required mental agility and reflexes. I'm a lot more impressed by criticism from someone whose pictures impress me. Rob says you do fine work, and I tend to take Rob's comments at face value, but so far all I've seen is a couple motorcycle and car snapshots and a really ugly nude. Do you do other stuff?

I'm a lot more impressed by criticism from someone whose pictures impress me. Do you do other stuff?

"RSL" why would I be at all concerned with what you or anybody else is impressed with?

I do lots of stuff and have done quite successfully for quite a long time. But I am not one who sees purpose in airing my works on a site such as this. I put up a couple for a giggle in 'Without Prejudice' from time to time.

I might add that it is appalling that anybody should make such a rude and insulting comment about a model in an image posted on any web forum. The image itself was not posted seeking criticism and I can assure you that the model certainly did not seek criticism.

... I might add that it is appalling that anybody should make such a rude and insulting comment about a model in an image posted on any web forum. The image itself was not posted seeking criticism and I can assure you that the model certainly did not seek criticism...

And I, for one, couldn't care less... once it is posted publicly, I consider it open for public criticism. And once your model allowed you to use her photo for anything else but audition for The Biggest Loser, she opened herself for public comments too. And those aren't going to be always nice.

As for political correctness, this must be a new high (or is it low?). What, there is no more ugly/beautiful distinction, we are all suddenly equally beautiful? Ugly is new beautiful? There is no ugly anymore? Or there is, but we can not say it?

Yes, I know "beauty is in the eye of the beholder" (or, in some cases, beerholder), and I know you can always find somebody finding something beautiful, but there are also generally accepted canons of beauty for any given time and place.

But I am not one who sees purpose in airing my works on a site such as this.

Obviously, Walter. But that raises the question: why are you even on here? As near as I can tell from what I've seen, and attempting to be polite, your efforts as a photographer fall well short of exceptional. So why does "a site such as this" attract you? There are plenty of other sites out there that are not "such as this." Have you been kicked off of all of them?

I might add that it is appalling that anybody should make such a rude and insulting comment about a model in an image posted on any web forum.

Walter, you are consistently among the rudest of regular posters here, and this is the second time I have noticed you chastising others for rudeness. I cannot help but suspect you of having a sense of humor.

I think the setting is lovely but the shot barely average. I understand that sometimes things don't conspire to create good composition. Keep the shot because it's worth it for a record. But as art or street itself? No, it's not very good.